Bush Will Start War to Try For "Rally Round the Flag", Ships to be SUNK

[Dems Will Win]

"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality--judiciously, as you will--we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

Now that the GOP is clearly going to lose the House, which means investigation and impeachment of Bush, what will the President--I mean Cheney--do now? Since another phony terror alert won't help, the options are mighty slim. It's either:

1) Do not start a war with Iran in the last week of October and lose the House and be impeached.

or

2) Start a war with Iran in the last week of October. This won't just be 5 days of bombing the nuke sites. Bushco now plans to lay waste to leadership bunkers, the Revolutionary Guard, the oil refineries and the 2 main oil ports. Bushco will drop a 3 kiloton nuclear bunker buster on the Natanz underground nuclear facilty, spreading radiation far into eastern Iran. THe dropping of the bomb will make the US and Israel huge vulnerable targets for nuclear retaliation, which the media will hype to no end, allowing Bushco to scare the base and the swing voters and the Security Moms on an entirely new level.

Special Forces and indigenous rebels and the Marines will take little Khuzestan (where all the oil is), Bushehr and the uninhabited southern Iranian coast. In Khuzestan, troops will carefully sabotage all the oil fields themselves without setting them afire. This and the closing of the Straits of Hormuz, the takeover of the Iranian oil ports, plus Iranian attacks on Saudi and UAE oilfields will make oil prices soar (the main goal ofthe operation, not the nukes or impossible regime change).

Bushco has already pulled the trigger on this. Norfolk Naval Base and other Navy bases were emptied out on October 1 and sent to the Gulf, loaded with mine sweepers, Coast Guard vessels, many Marines, Special Ops and equipment.



The Pentagon will, in the first days of the war, let the media and the country see several large US Navy vessels SUNK and hundreds or even thousands of sailors DROWN, hit by Silkworm and new Russian anti-ship missiles. The US Navy is defenseless against these new Russian missiles. It will be like shooting ducks in a barrel.

This will cause a short-lived Rally Round The Flag effect, as the media intones the name of Pearl Harbor, Pearl Harbor, Ships Sunk, Thousands of Sailors Killed. The movie "Pearl Harbor" will be re-run again. Bush will declare WW III has begun and ask the Congress for a Declaration of War and try to pretend he is FDR.

The base will then turn out to vote and the independent swings will swing back some--as World War III brings up the security issue again.

This brings the election in key races close enough for the already planned voter suppression and computer-vote stealing.

The GOP keeps the House and Senate.

Clearly within a few weeks of WW III starting, the casualty figures out of Iraq, where our 140,000 troops will suddenly be cut to ribbons by 700,000 armed Shia militia, will finally get into the media. BUT THIS WILL BE AFTER THE STOLEN ELECTION.

In November, as the US looks doomed to defeat, Bush will plead with Congress and send general after general up to the REPUBLICAN MAJORITY and demand that they reinstate the DRAFT so the US can win the War on Terror.

The Republicans, who already told Karl Rove in 2003 they would reinstate the DRAFT if Bush asked them to, REINSTATE THE COMBAT DRAFT AND WITH IT COMES THE SKILLS AND MEDICAL DRAFTS.

Just remember the rule of thumb in dealing with fascists: Think of the worst thing you can imagine them doing, then TRIPLE it.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

However, I have a plan, my friends.

We need to get the word out that Bush is deliberately sending the Navy--virtually unprotected by not having enough boots on the ground--to the Persian Gulf to be sunk by the Iranian Silkworms and new anti-ship missiles from the Russians.

The sinking of the Navy ships in this insane action has clearly been planned for several months. Option 2 is WW III and a deliberately planned massive American defeat at sea, and we are now just a few weeks away.

Here is a link explaining Bushco's plan for the war with Iran:

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact

IF YOU WANT TO GET THE WORD OUT ON ALL THIS, RECOMMEND!

[yurbud]

1. I've been telling people about this since Cheney asked for nuke Iran plans

and people just can't believe--and probably won't until it happens.

If it does, we will be depending on Russia, China, and even Iran, to act more sanely than Bush and his enablers.

[Kikosexy2]

20. Post this...

non-stop repeatedly on Freeper sites...expose the Oct. Surprise...get them uptight...

[yurbud]

37. problem is if paying attention at all, they buy the Iran propaganda

[blm]

2. Operation Northwoods redux. They wouldn't care about downtown New York

or the people there, so I don't expect thay care much about sinking our own ships.

[progressivebydesign]

45. Just thinking about OP Northwoods today... everyone should read up on it.

There are many on DU that don't know that particular scheme. It's worth googling..

[blm]

47. Heh - that was SO 1961. Too many @DU turn their noses up at anything that

happened before 2000. As if it hurts their heads to connect the dots. ;)))

But, there are many of us who agree with you completely.

[John Gauger]

98. Was that the staged terrorist attacks

meant to frame Cuba? The CIA blew up an unmanned drone claiming that Cuba did it, killing eight "students" that were supposedly on board. At the same time they were routinely carrying out terrorist attack in Santiago, Cuba.

[blm]

107. Before that, even. Northwoods op included blowing up a rocket with hero

John Glenn inside and blame it on Cuba.

[John Gauger]

139. You're fucking kidding me

Who the hell came up with that idea?

[mom cat]

60. We MUST hit the streets the day it happens and the next dat and tre

the next. Those ships are full of sitting ducks and we MUST hit the streets and keep saying GEORGE DID THIS ON PURPOSE!

[Double T]

3. Might explain Condi's sudden trip to Iraq with an ultimatum.........

to the new Iraqi leadership, get your country in order or else. Could it be that the GREATEST INSANITY of bushco is YET TO COME???? These idiots are real scary!!

[burythehatchet]

6. Iran will be at least as important as a semicolon

;

[patcox2]

4. "Remember the Maine" Only thing is, it will not work.

Bush lacks the credibility for this to work. People overwhelmingly believe gas prices are going down for political reasons, and they will be equally sceptical of a war before the election.

[bunny planet]

5. Might I suggest passing this information on to Olbermann

If it gets on the air, even if its reported with some skepticism, it will be out there is the public airwaves that they planned this, so that when it happens, the dots will be connected.

Its really our only hope to head it off. Get it out there on the teevee.
Any other ideas.
This is my biggest fear, when these shits are cornered, they will do anything.
:scared: :nuke: :cry:

[smoogatz]

11. Sy Hersh has been reporting on Bushco's plan to attack Iran for months.

The information's out there. But that's not going to stop them.

[bunny planet]

25. getting it on the teevee, and having it in the New Yorker are two

very different things. Not everyone reads the New Yorker, I do, you do, lots of people do, but not nearly as many as watch the boobtube. And Keith has already been gaining audience and pissing off others with his unflinching coverage of news others in his media won't touch. Whether they love him or hate him, they watch. Its important to get this out there, thereby making everyone very suspicious if they go ahead with it. I admit, not much stops them, they don't care, the quote about them creating new realities by their actions is a chilling one. Let's at least try and prevent them from distorting reality again before its too late.

[Chomp]

7. There will be no war with Iran in October

And most probably not at all.

[Brundle_Fly]

8. based on your....

gut?

insider info?

premonition?

explain

[Hissyspit]

10. Wow, you've convinced me!

Great counter-arguments.

[Bandit]

16. I sure hope you are correct but the signs are there for all to see.

It is good to be optimistic for sure

[smoogatz]

19. Thanks, oh all-knowing one.

I feel much better.

[Vincardog]

50. Chomp is right. There will be no war with IRan in October

aWoL plans to sacrifice our forces for his political benefit again. That is not a WAR. That is in fact Genocide.

[The Magistrate]

54. Thank You So Much For The Chuckle, Sir

That closing bit is absolutely priceless....

[bunny planet]

9. I just sent this and the New Yorker article link to KO

[Dems Will Win]

14. Good work!

Now let's send out to our e-mail lists.

[liberal N proud]

12. Ships are expendable to these monsters

They are just a tool for them to get what they want, more war.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

112. like the Twin Towers were...

:cry:

[bdamomma]

114. they have no compassion for life, isn't Iraq and Afghanistan

enough proof, that they are sick.

[badgerpup]

13. Didn't I see a thread about N. Korea doing a bit of 'nucular' testing...

...of its own?
Where is the 'Shock and Awe' revue going to be playing next time?

Asking because the second atomic bomb in Japan was not necessary. The war was over.
This was a message to the U.S.S.R. that "This wasn't a fluke, boys. We can do it again, if you really piss us off."

I'm wondering where the N Korean 'message' will be delivered.
:scared::scared::scared::scared::scared:

[Dems Will Win]

15. If the bomb is dropped on Natanz it will be all nuke, all the time.

[patcox2]

73. The war with the USSR was just beginning.

The US had just been forced to give up eastern europe to communist domination. The USSR had millions of troops poised to attack Manchuria. the second bomb was to ward off the russians.

[John Gauger]

100. Yup

It was all about imperialist domination. Stalin can't be allowed to oppress Manchuria becuase Chiang Kai-Shek has to do it for us.

[Art_from_Ark]

119. It didn't stop the Soviets from invading and occupying Japanese

territory.

In fact, Stalin declared war on Japan, and began his subsequent invasion of Japanese islands, two days after Hiroshima.

[Zech Marquis]

134. as a matter of fact...

North Korea is supposed to conduct this test between Sunday and Tuesday--probably on Columbus Day just like what happened on the 4th of July :nuke: :scared: The Yomiuri newspaper has this as a leading headline story right now...

[paparush]

17. We, THE PEOPLE, must not let this happen!!!

We must not let Bush do this. We must flood the streets. Fill the jails. Storm the walls if necessary to prevent this madman from starting WWIII, Armageddon, Rapture, etc...

Iran, like Iraq, is a country that HAS NOT ATTACKED US.

My 11 year old son is not going to die for these fascists lunatics.

[bdamomma]

113. We have to act cuz we all know this lunatic is not in his right mind.

he believes what he believes, and hears what he wants to hear.

[smoogatz]

18. I think they really are that crazy.

It's horrifying. But I don't think they have a very good handle on the mood of the country at large; my guess is that if they start another war without a damned good reason for doing so, the American people are likely to rise up and vote Republicans out of office overwhelmingly. Also, I'm not sure the Iranians are dumb enough to take the bait; I don't think they'd attack American ships without clear and well-documented provocation on the scale of U.S. shelling of downtown Tehran. At least I hope not.

On edit: I also think (hope may be the better word for it) that Bushco may face the real possibility of mutiny in the military of they try something like this. What Navy Admiral is going to blithely sacrifice thousands of his men for the sake of saving Bush's imperial ass? I just can't believe that, knowing what they must know about Iran's anti-ship capabilities, they'd willingly sail their friends, colleagues, and the men and women whose well-being they're responsible for protecting into that particular hornet's nest. Honestly, I can't imagine this happening.

[BlueEyedSon]

22. It's not "crazy", it's CYA. The have painted themselves into a corner.

[smoogatz]

32. Sorry, but starting WWIII and killing millions of innocent people to CYA

is the fucking definition of crazy.

[BlueEyedSon]

34. What other choice do they have to stay in power?

Was Iraq "crazy"? No, just evil, wasteful, immoral & illegal.

[smoogatz]

43. There's nothing rational about the willingness to sacrifice the lives

of thousands or millions for the sake of mere political power. Iraq was crazy, in that it, too, was largely politically motivated. Mostly, though, it was just incredibly fucking stupid. I'm reading "Fiasco"--if you haven't picked up a copy yet, it's an amazing account of how thoroughly idiotic the entire Bushco apparatus is, top to bottom.

[bbgrunt]

79. while I hope we can count on a military mutiny, I think your

reasoning about knowingly sinking our own ships is a bit naive. It would never appear that way. It would be a false flag operation just like 9-11.

[Dems Will Win]

84. False flag is not needed

Just place all those ships in the Gulf, Rummy nukes Natanz and within days many of those ships will be on the bottom with their crews.

Some on this thread are fighting the last war. This is neo-con evil at its height. Treason--which they will chalk up to incompetence again.

"No one could anticipate that the enemy would have bought the new Russian anti-ship missile with their oil money," they'll say.

The whole point is to start the DRAFT as well. Imagine 3 million men under arms for Bushco. Surly men, for sure. But if they get too surly, they will be taken care of. They need those troops for regime change in Syria and Iran, see? The extra number will take back Iraq and Afghanistan. If you thought the cowboy who gets defeated in the beginning of the western just gives up and leaves, you don't know Dumbya and Rummy and Big Dick. This is a challenge to their manhood after the planned defeat.

I really don't see much downside for Cheney. Bushco is hoping for a nuclear attack on this country as well. Then martial law and no more elections. This war will set off a whole chain of events that is exactly what the neo-cons want.

I'm hoping for Option #1 in the OP but watching the Coast Guard Search and Rescue vessels set sail for the Gulf on Sunday means it's Option #2.

I know! Maybe Cheney will have a change of heart before October 21 and turn the ships around!

Oh wait, that's right! Cheney doesn't have a heart...

[smoogatz]

85. So, you're saying Bushco will pre-emptively nuke Iran,

Iran will retaliate by sinking a few USN ships, and then Americans will, in a sudden fit of pro-Bush fervor, vote the Repigs back into office? That makes even less sense than what I thought you'd said originally--which is that US warships would attempt to provoke a response from Iran with a bit of exploratory shelling, Iran would sink a couple, and then we'd nuke them in retaliation. Or am I still misunderstanding you?

[Dems Will Win]

103. As soon as we bomb Iran, Hezbollah will attack Israel

and Iran will attack Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and Kuwait oil refineries and ports with missiles and sabotage. At the same moment the anti-ship missiles will start to take their toll and the 700,000 Shia militia will suddenly turn full force on the American and British troops in Iraq.

Sy Hersch has already reported that Bush will pre-emptively nuke Natanz in the first strike. It's deliberately starting WW III in short.

It's the GOP's final resort and it looks like they just deployed the force to do it.

[solara]

80. I don't like being pessimistic, but

If this scenario actually plays out.. if, in fact, the Bush regime actually attacks Iran, do you honestly believe there will -still- be elections? What better reason to stop them altogether? They would declare martial law for "our own protection". I have no doubt Bush and his brown-shirts are already figuring a way to prevent the next election from happening ..as well as any more elections...ever. Bush said it himself ..(paraphrased) "It would be a lot easier if this were a dicatorship (pause) as long as I'm the dictator"

[smoogatz]

86. Believe me, the thought had crossed my mind.

See my sig line. I'm well aware of Bushco's fascist leanings--and certainly expanding the war, declaring martial law and suspending the elections are the logical next steps, right out of Mussolini's playbook. But here I am, looking out of my office window at this beautiful October day in Wisconsin, and I just don't believe they'll really do it. As I've said elsewhere in this thread, they'd have to be completely insane. That said, I won't be all that surprised if it DOES happen--Iran, suspended elections, martial law, the draft. Nope. In fact, I'll be packing up the house, and figuring out the shortest route to Canada.

[PurpleChez]

123. Howdy! and well said.

[demigoddess]

115. they are not only crazy, but they get off on it. They also are still

convinced it will be just like in the movies, with a happy ending and no consequences in the end.I would not worry so much if it were only men who would die. But we are dealing with depleated uranium and nukes. these guys are not scientists and have no idea of consequences.

[w4rma]

21. These people are totally insane. I wouldn't put it past them. (nt)

[Jack Rabbit]

23. A nuclear strike on Iran?

So what does it take to convene an international tribunal to bring Bush and his regime's other war criminals to justice?

It's long overdue.



The Palace of Peace
The Hague
Home of the International Criminal Court

Photo from the Dossier Nederland (The Netherlands)

[librechik]

24. wrong title on the New Yorker piece. Should be

"would Bush start a war with Iran to win the midterm elections?" Not "would Bush start a war to stop Iran from getting nukes."

[philb]

30. Good Grief!!!!!!!!!!

n/t

check that...................MORONS!!!

this really helps

now that little pos over in the freeper factory has more ammo

don't some of you ever learn?????

THINK! THINK! FOCUS..........FOCUS

throw away the tin foil coupons

[librechik]

35. I'm just going from history

he started a war with Iraq to win the midterm elections. Why wouldn't he do the same thing again? It worked very well for that purpose, although it didn't work as a "real" war.


I don't need tinfoil. You need a chill pill.

[BlueEyedSon]

39. Exactly, it's not like they really went into Iraq to find WMDS.

It was for POLITICAL CAPITAL, and it WORKED.

[philb]

48. sorry,

some other tin-foiler distracted me..

look, that argument was lost years ago when all of our fearless leaders voted to invade iraq to rid ourselves of the threat presented by saddams huge inventory of weapons of mass destruction.

this isn't the kind of argument that wins votes but it is the kind of argument that splits the voter roles

go review the congressional record and if you have any questions bring them back to the forum

[JunkYardDogg]

26. The Fleet Deployment is probably to replace the Fleet on Duty

The present fleet deployed in the Gulf is scheduled to return soon.
It could be that they have to return sooner than scheduled for equipment repair and maintenance problems due to severe usage in the gulf.
The Nov mid-terms are extremely important to the Bush Reich, but I do not think they will do something like this until 2008. And that will probably be a staged "Terrorist" attack within the U.S., probably with a Chemical/Biological weapon or a suitcase Nuke and blame it on the Terrorists to entrench power to Butcher Bush and perhaps cancel the Presidential elections.
The more realistic scenario is the implementation of the draft, which will result in massive violence in the U.S. and the use of the military, under the command of Christian Religious Extremist Generals to repress U.S. citizens. The resulting bloodbath will be unprecedented in U.S. history and will create a coup against the Bush Reich pitting Christian Religious Extremist Controlled Military units against Patriotic National Guard units and military units commanded by patriotic American Generals (on duty and retired).
Butcher Bush and the Bush Reich are just getting warmed up.
I wonder what division General Gannon is going to command?

[LSK]

27. I saw this war plan 6 months ago, ITS NOT HAPPENING IN OCT

Can we get over this already????

There is no NEW media blitz about Iran. There is NO REASON TO ATTACK THEM.

Iran is not in the news. THERE IS NOTHING NEW IN THAT SITUATION. NO ESCALATION. NOTHING.

IT WILL NOT WORK.

BUSH CANT JUST OUT OF THE BLUE ATTACK IRAN.

[BlueEyedSon]

38. Maybe he'll get a FedEx from Niger?

[LSK]

42. he better hurry up then

Because nobody thinks Iran is an imminent threat right now.

[Just-plain-Kathy]

116. I was thinking...

...imminent threat could be conjured up in a two day news cycle.

[tblue]

56. I hope to God you are right

but I don't put ANYTHING past these monsters. Yes they would kill, yes they would start a war, yes they would say US interests were attacked if it would help them retain this power.

[Dems Will Win]

58. Sorry you didn't get the memo

Just yesterday:

Iran negotiations collapse, nuke standoff continues

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

NEW YORK - Iran's refusal to freeze uranium enrichment has sabotaged talks meant to defuse the standoff over its nuclear program, opening the way for the U.N. Security Council to start considering sanctions next week, senior U.N. diplomats said Tuesday.

The diplomats spoke on condition of anonymity, citing an agreement not to publicly pronounce the talks dead before a final attempt by European Union envoy Javier Solana and Tehran's chief nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, to bridge differences in a phone call scheduled for Wednesday.

But with both sides standing firm, "the talks are considered a failure," even in key European capitals that had favored negotiations over U.N. sanctions, said one of the diplomats, adding the Larijani-Solana phone call could focus on nothing more than how to publicly acknowledge that the discussions had failed.

Beginning Sept. 9, the talks had been billed as a final attempt to head off a confrontation between Tehran and the Security Council.
http://www.alligator.org/pt2/061004ap_iran.php

[earth mom]

75. Haven't you been paying attention?

* just got himself crowned dictator last week. He'll do whatever he damn well pleases!

:scared:

[bdamomma]

118. But didn't Bush attack Iraq right out of the blue?

[redacted]

131. Their whole purpose is to make the attack a complete surprise.

It will be unprovoked, come without warning and launch in the middle of the night on a night without moonlight.

[The Magistrate]

28. None Of This Is Going To Happen, Sir

[EVDebs]

122. Agreed. Many are aware of the wargaming results

however,


Monday, April 17th, 2006
Retired Colonel Sam Gardiner on Iran War Plans: "The Issue is Not Whether the Military Option Would Be Used But Who Approved the Start of Operations Already"

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/04/17/143241

Have Dems in Congress investigated who threw this switch ?

[theHandpuppet]

135. I agree.

And it would take more time than I have right now to explain why that is so.

[leftofthedial]

29. they want to upgrade the Navy anyway

more war profiteering is needed

[philb]

33. WTF

how the fuck do you "upgrade" a navy?

kinkos doesn't sell this shit

maybe you meant "modernize"?? but somehow i doubt it

[leftofthedial]

44. sink all the old shit

then we need to build a new one

since the old one was insufficient, we'll need a bigger, shinier on

upgrade.

[The_Warmth]

130. i'm afraid it fits...

1. To raise to a higher grade or standard: upgrading their military defenses.

First def off of firefox dictionary

[LSK]

51. hard to build a new Navy when your enemy (China) makes your materials

[Ouabache]

121. think they will give Halliburton no-bids to build SHIPYARDS 1st?

You betcha!

[John Gauger]

99. They don't need an excuse to give away money

to the military-industrial complex. They do it regardless of what state our Navy is in. They routinely buy things that are completely useless. They couldn't justify buying any more submarines after the Cold War ended, so they invented a torpedo that you put eight Marines into and launch onto the beach. Each costs something on the order of eight million dollars, not to mention the billions for the new subs. This was bought during the war with Afghanistan, which is landlocked. Israel performs similar operations with handmade canvas canoes, costing about two dollars each.

[originalpckelly]

31. Remember the Maine(nt)

[philb]

36. remember the

Liberty if you're going to remember any ship

[verdalaven]

40. Couldn't this backfire, too?

I acknowledge that his base is not too bright, but couldn't this scenario just as easily make bush and his cronies look bad? Not just a little bad, but the world raining down hell on us bad?

I would think that the draft would be the least of our troubles.

[bonzotex]

41. Interesting thoughts, but ....

Ok, let me cover myself in lighter fluid for those of you who read too much Tom Clancy and stare a little too hard at maps and Jane's Defense Weekly.

The US Navy is not as defenseless against these missiles as you suggest.

As crazy as Bushco may be, the Navy has a pretty strong say in how they risk their capital ships. The Admirals may be Bushco sympathizers in some cases but they have no intention of losing one of their precious ships or thousands of sailors and airmen just so they can have a bigger war.

The Pentagon has already quietly revolted against Busco's desire to plan nuke strikes on Iran. The flag officers in the Pentagon are sick of Rummy, Smirky and Snarly breaking their beloved military machine.

The Sy Hersch article is excellent but still speculation and doesn't even come close to suggesting the course you lay out.

Bush is certainly not above using and abusing the military for political reasons. A simpler and more likely analysis is the repukes are just using tension with Iran to up the scare factor for their base. A shooting war with Iran will speed the republican downfall, not strengthen it. The political calculators on the repug side know this. A more likely time for a Bushco attack on Iran is after the elections, not before.

The Navy deployment underway is the normal rotation of one carrier battle group. The force being sent there is pitifully inadequate for any real assault on Iran. That may argue for their being sitting ducks for a planned "incident", but then we've had such sitting ducks in the Persian gulf for years. Some of the crazy neocons in the administration might welcome an attack on the US Navy to galvanize support, but there is nothing about this deployment that is more unusual than the Naval presence we've maintained in the region for a decade.

The Iranians have absolutely no incentive to strike first at a US Navy task force. The win by just complaining and letting the Bush admin act unhinged.

We are better served by working to educate voters using established facts, getting out the vote and monitoring the elections to minimize fraud and voter suppression.

OK, flame away....

[Burma Jones]

46. How DARE you make sense

nice post.

[LSK]

52. agreed

[philb]

55. interesting question, but....

it isn't actually a question as to whether the caommander in chief can place ships (capital or otherwise) at risk. each ship's commander is tasked, obligated, sworn, (and maybe even presented with a secret decoder ring) to protect and defend.

all bullshit aside, every ship commander has a duty to his ship and crew and having spent 30 years in the U.S. Navy, i have not and do not expect to ever meet a ship driver that will bend to political pressure to hazard vessel or crew

iran is not a threat, iran has never been a threat, and iran will never be a threat

now, if you want to talk about their proxies we have an entirely different topic to discuss but it will not involve U.S. naval forces at anything more than a stand-off targeting solution

[bonzotex]

59. thanks for a Navy voice on this...

13 years Air Force officer here and with lots of JTF experience with the Navy. I hate what is being done to and with our military. Unfortunately too many people on all ends of the political spectrum think of the armed forces as just pieces on a game board.

It's that kind of ignorance in the White house and Congress that got us here and we don't help matters when we argue from ignorance and speculation on our side.

[patcox2]

57. They could do an air or cruise missile strike on nuclear targets.

While keeping the fleet out of range of the Iranian anti-ship missiles.

But I doubt even that, as the public would not buy it and would conclude he is "wagging the dog."

There is information out there that the current carrier force in the area has had its tour extended, so there will be two.

But even then, its more likely just brinksmanship, they aren't looking for a shooting incident, but a nice little Cuban Missile Crisis (TM) could be something they'd welcome.

[philb]

64. trust me

there is no "information out there"

if you aren't dumping trash off the stern, you don't have a clue where the fleet is

and as an aside..........most of the mess cranks don't have a clue either



sleep safe, someone is standing watch

[bonzotex]

68. yeah, unfortunately the Navy gets used as visible statement.

Upping the naval presence in any hot spot is an old and highly visible way of raising the stakes. Even two carrier battle groups in the area doesn't provide the forces necessary to do comprehensive strikes on Iran.

The Pentagon is not going to let Chimpy do 1/2 assed punitive strikes on a few installations. If that is in the works for real, you bet your ass the generals and admirals will leak it to the press.

This is for show. Big deployments of uncommitted USAF squadrons, alert of uncommitted ground units, a third carrier group dispatched, more bombers to Diego Garcia, then I will start freaking out a little.

[Dems Will Win]

61. They have defenses against the old Silkworms but NONE

against the new Russkis. Ducks in a barrel.

We are better served by working to educate voters using established facts, getting out the vote and monitoring the elections to minimize fraud and voter suppression.


Good thought but none of that will work with US Navy ships sinking and Bush asking for World War III declaration.

God I hope I'm wrong and you're right.

The bounce would only be until the election and then Bush will have to quickly reinstate the DRAFT.

Then EVERYONE will hate the Repervlicans--but it will be too late!

Just like Karl planned it.

[Dems Will Win]

63. Here is the real info:

U.S. Strike Groups: Cargo intended for War?

The U.S.S. Enterprise a U.S. Navy flagship is under deployment to the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea. This includes all the warships and vessels that compose Carrier Strike Group 12 (CSG 12) Destroyer Squadron 2 (DESRON 2), and Carrier Air Wing 1 (CVW 1). The stated objective for the deployment of the U.S.S. Enterprise, a nuclear powered aircraft carrier, and other U.S. Navy vessels is to conduct naval security operations and aerial missions in the region. The deployment does not mention Iran, it is said to be part of the U.S.-led “War on Terror” under “Operation Enduring Freedom.”

Originally the name for Operation Enduring Freedom was “Operation Infinite Justice,” which highlights the unlimited scope and intentions of the War on Terror. “Operation Iraqi Freedom” which envelops the Anglo-American invasion and the continued occupation of Iraq is also a component of these operations. A large number of U.S. warships are deployed in the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, and the Arabian Sea.

While this deployment is said to be related to ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the warships are carrying with them equipment which is not intended for these two war theaters. Minesweepers and mine-hunters have absolutely no use in landlocked Afghanistan and are not needed in Iraq which has a maritime corridor and ports totally controlled by the Anglo-American alliance.

Other warships in the Enterprise Strike Group include the destroyer U.S.S. McFaul, the war frigate U.S.S. Nicholas, the battle cruiser U.S.S. Leyte Gulf, the attack submarine U.S.S. Alexandria, and the “fast combat support ship” U.S.N.S. Supply. The U.S.N.S. Supply will be a useful vessel in confronting the Iranian forces in the Persian Gulf in close-quarter combat. Speed will be an important factor in responding to potentially lethal Iranian missile and anti-ship missile attacks.

The U.S.S. Enterprise carries with it a host of infiltration, aerial attack, and rapid deployment units. This includes Marine Strike Fighter Squadron 251, Electronic Attack Squadron 137, and Airborne Early Warning Squadron 123. Squadron 123 will be vital in the event of a war with Iran in detecting Iranian missiles and sending warnings of danger to the U.S. fleet. Special mention should be made of the helicopter squadron specialized for combating submarines traveling with the strike group. “Helicopter Anti-Submarine Squadron 11” will be on board the U.S.S. Enterprise. The Persian Gulf is known to be the home of the Iranian submarine fleet, the only indigenous submarine fleet in the region.

The Eisenhower Strike Group, based in Norfolk, Virginia, has also received orders to deploy to the Middle East. The strike group is led by the U.S.S. Eisenhower, another nuclear battleship. It includes a cruiser, a destroyer, a war frigate, a submarine escort, and U.S. Navy supply ships. One of these two naval strike groups will position itself in the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea while the other naval strike group will position itself in the Persian Gulf, both off the Iranian coast.

Another Strike Group Performs Anti-submarine Drills and sets sail for the Persian Gulf

Another assault or strike group of U.S. warships, “Expeditionary Strike Group 5,” are setting off to sea too. This strike group is setting sail from Naval Station San Diego with the Persian Gulf in the Middle East as their final destination. Over 6,000 U.S. Marines and Navy personnel will be deployed to the Persian Gulf and Anglo-American occupied Iraq from San Diego.4 Approximately 4,000 U.S. sailors and 2,200 U.S. Marines from the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit at Camp Pendleton will make the bulk of the force. The warships and the servicemen they carry will reportedly have a tour of duty in the Persian Gulf and “possibly” Anglo-American occupied Iraq for half a year. They will also be joined by other ships including a Coast Guard vessel. A Marine air wing of 38 helicopters also is on board and travelling to the Persian Gulf.

The Marine contingent of the force is not destined for deployment in Iraq. It must be noted that the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit is, however, able to “rapidly deploy” on “order” using large landing craft stowed aboard the strike group’s warships. If ordered this rapid deployment unit has the strong potential of being used as part of an invasion force against Iran from the Persian Gulf. The Marine unit would be ideal in being part of an operation with the objective(s) of securing Iranian ports to create beachheads for an invasion.

Expeditionary Strike Group 5 (ESG 5) is being led by the assault ship the U.S.S. Boxer as the flagship. Expeditionary Strike Group 5 (ESG 5) will also consist of the U.S.S. Dubuque, a “dock landing vessel,” the naval transport ship the U.S.S. Comstock, the battle cruiser the U.S.S. Bunker Hill, the guided-missile hauling destroyer the U.S.S. Benfold, and the guided-missile hauling destroyer the U.S.S. Howard. Once again, these vessels will all be deployed in the Persian Gulf, in nearby proximity to the Iranian coast.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15212.htm

[The Magistrate]

67. That Is Not Information, Sir: It Is ill-Informed Speculation

From an Iranian national without the least channel of information to the councils of the U.S. government or military leadrrship.

[FogerRox]

128. Um,I like the part about the Ike

"the U.S.S. Eisenhower, another nuclear battleship."

The Ike is a carrier, and we have never had a nuclear battleship.

[The_Warmth]

132. I believe it may be...

referring to a nuclear reactor.

[bonzotex]

72. it's not crazy to be afraid of what the Repukes might do

In this case I think your scenario is far-fetched. I hope you are wrong, but the situation does bear watching.

Unca Karl is really good at yanking politicians chains to get them to dance. The Pentagon, not so much. Yes civilians control the Pentagon but there is a limit to what they can do. It may not seem like it, but there are patriots and principled leaders in the Military who won't follow all orders blindly.

[semillama]

81. Thanks for pointing out the obvious

Although the admin is pretty evil, I don't think that the military is going to let itself be set up like that. I think people are overreacting to this.

Another factor is that our military is already spread thin, not just men, but MATERIALS. I mean, we dropped a hell of a lot of bombs on Iraq. They don't grow on trees, you know!


If I'm wrong, I'll apologize.

[Dems Will Win]

83. THe equipment and building back up our missile stocks

is why the neo-cons had to wait THIS long to start the next war.

Now they have the Cruise missiles they need and they've scavenged the rest of the services to scrape together the planned defeat with Iran.

The idea is to fail and see ships sunk and sailors drowned en masse and temporarily trick the swing vote and bring out the base.

The idea is not to succeed.

Whether it works or not we shall see, but they didn't deploy the fleet just to do some small exercises, this is a true deployment and they even took all those Coast Guard vessels for Search and Rescue with them!

Just think of all the great video of the US Coast Guard rescuing sailors in the Gulf. That, plus destroying the refineries and sabotaging the fields is all they are interested in. They know the bunker buster won't stop the nuclear development, and there's actually a new plant in the Northwest where the Iranians are really deep underground where the real action is. I predict they will ignore the real plant, nuke Natanz and leave the bomb-making facility for later when the DRAFT gives Bushco 2-3 million men.

[Daphne08]

104. Sounds reasonable to me. n/t

[ThoughtCriminal]

109. I'm also skeptical

I think that letting ships get hit would pretty much require some cooperation from the Navy and Air Force. Even asking for that kind of cooperation would be a huge risk. There is a chance that Iran might get in a lucky shot or two, but it would be foolish for Bush to count on it.

[sce56]

124. Remember the USS Liberty! Almost sunk by the Isrelies in the 6 day war

The aircraft from Navy flatops were called back many died http://www.ussliberty.org/
Heard Johnson wanted it to sink so as to get into it against Egypt!

Got Fascism Yet?

[sentelle]

110. OK, here's a match

If that were so, explain the stark incident? If memory serves me right, SM 2's don't do so well against seaskimming missiles (like the Exocet), and since the Persian gulf is a bit of a bathtub, seaskimmers are ideal, stealthy as shit, (hard to read on radar EVEN for Aegis) and does much of its damage at the waterline.

For those not understanding what I am talking about, picture it, 1983, Persian gulf, USS Stark (a Perry class frigate) is attacked by an Iraqi Exocet missile. Read and discuss.

Additionally, how do we deal with the chinese that have been using iranian naval bases to stage their warships? Do we risk waging war against our bank?

[bonzotex]

125. The Stark incident is worth remembering

Modern anti-ship missiles are no joke, deadly as hell and hard to defend against. The Stark was having some systems problems, was operating independently, had limited defense systems plus it was not expecting an attack from an Iraqi aircraft while the Navy at the time was focused on Iranian threats. The SM2 is not the preferred defense against sea skimmers, but rather the close in defense is by radar directed 20mm gatling guns which if I remember correctly the one unit on the Stark was out of commission that day. I might be wrong.

The Navy definitely learned some lessons from that one. Remember also the Vincennes shooting down an Iranian airliner it thought might be a fighter lining up for a missile attack. Mistakes can be made, systems can fail, defenses can be penetrated. Politicians can make stupid decisions concerning deployments.

No doubt about it, the Iranians can be very dangerous, can damage and even sink US ships. But this thread has gone beyond discussing weapon systems capabilities, defensive capabilities and strategies.
Because something is possible doesn't make it probable or inevitable.

The OP is ascribing unknowable intent and motives and claiming that our ships will be helpless and sitting ducks. I think that's a stretch. In any tactical conflict both sides have a vote in the outcome. From what I know about the US Navy; it's weapons, tactics and leadership, they won't sit sit and take a missile attack to win political points for their civilian leaders and they do have the capability to defend themselves against Iranian weapons, even the newest ones.

[sce56]

126. And who would have thought that the entire US Air Force would be made

impotent against 19 hijacker with box cutters to be defeated on 911?
Got Fascism Yet?

[bonzotex]

138. Oh !...SNAP!

OK I see where this goes.

Only a tiny fraction of the USAF was concerned with continental air defense on 9/11. Still, since that tiny fraction was unable or unwilling to shoot down airliners on 9/11, I suppose you can say the entire USAF was defeated.

A more apt analogy to this OP would be to say the that USAF F-15s are helpless when faced with modern civilian airliners. Absurd, but I will admit that if supersonic fighters with air to air missiles are our first and only defense against terrorists, then we have already lost the fight.

The failure of lethal air defense on 9/11 is very well explained by failures in command, control and communication that day. Not as intellectually sexy as Cheney and a clique of beady-eyed neocons huddled in a bunker, issuing stand-down orders and watching their diabolical plan unfold.

Where I think we can agree:
We are right to be suspicious about any use of the military by the Bush administration.

The military is an incredibly blunt instrument in most cases and shouldn't be used a substitute for diplomacy.

Our ships, planes, tanks, etc, are not invulnerable nor are the men and women that crew them expendable for political cool points.

The Bush admin has demonstrated repeatedly they can't be trusted with the keys to a car much less command of the military. This administration will never honestly investigate any of their failures.

I look forward to working with you and other patriots to remove these criminals from power, conduct real investigations and prosecute anyone that has broken the law.

[DrDebug]

49. K&R

[tblue]

53. So they are literally going to KILL people so they can stay in power

[DrDebug]

70. It's just another sacrifice. It's not like it is Bush's first kill

2,736 troops in Iraq; 341 troops in Afghanistan; at least 1,836 in Katrina due to negligence. Add to that the number of casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan which is even many, many times higher.

Politicians and military are very capable of killing their own, if it results in killing more of the "enemy."

[FogerRox]

62. Not a lot of movement. If we see 4,5, or 6 carriers in the Persian Gulf

Then its time to get worried.

15th & 24th Marine Expeditionary Units on the move

Strike group sails from San Diego Sept. 13th for the Western Pacific. Includes 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit
ESG 5 is comprised of Howard, USS Boxer (LHD 4), USS Dubuque (LPD 8), USS Comstock (LSD 45), USS Benfold (DDG 65) and USS Bunker Hill (CG 52). The strike group also includes Amphibious Squadron 5, the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit, Coast Guard Cutter Midgett (WHEC 726) and Canadian Frigate HMCS Ottawa (FFH 341).
http://www.military.com/features/0,15240,114365,00.html


Marines hit the beaches of Kuwait for training
By Jennifer H. Svan, Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Monday, October 2, 2006
Marines and sailors deployed with the Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group came ashore on a Kuwait beach Sunday to begin about a month of training in the country. The group includes Marines from the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit at Camp Lejeune, N.C., and sailors from Beach Master Unit 2 at Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek, Little Creek, Va. The strike group is on a six-month deployment.
http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=40467



You see... another carrier group should be place by the 21st. WE are talking about more than a few Tomahawks.

USS Eisenhower to deploy to Mideast

The aircraft carrier battle group is scheduled to sail Tuesday from Norfolk to relieve the USS Enterprise. <snip> The Enterprise left Norfolk on May 2, along with the cruiser USS Leyte Gulf, the destroyer USS McFaul, the frigate USS Nicholas and the attack submarine USS Alexandria.

http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/dp-38837sy0sep28,0,6555714.story?coll=dp-news-local-final

The Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group also includes
-guided-missile cruiser USS Anzio-CG-68 :
Armament: MK26 missile launcher (CG 47 thru CG 51) Standard Missile (MR) or MK41 vertical launching system (CG 52 thru CG 73) Standard Missile (MR); Vertical Launch ASROC (VLA) Missile; Tomahawk Cruise Missile; Six MK-46 torpedoes (from two triple mounts); Two MK 45 5-inch/54 caliber lightweight guns; Two Phalanx close-in-weapons systems.
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4200&tid=800&ct=4

-guided-missile destroyer USS Ramage-DDG-61
Armament: two MK 41 VLS for Standard missiles, Tomahawk; Harpoon missile launchers, one Mk 45 5-inch/54 caliber lightweight gun, two Phalanx CIWS, Mk 46 torpedoes (from two triple tube mounts)
http://www.navysite.de/dd/ddg61.htm

ARLEIGH BURKE - class Guided Missile Destroyer USS Mason-DDG-87
Armament 1 x 5"/62 RF, Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM), 90 VLS Cells,
2 SH-60B helicopters, 8 Harpoon Missiles, 6 x 12.75" TT.
http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/01087.htm

Los Angeles-class attack submarine USS Newport News-SSN-750
Carries Tomahawks:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/navy/ssn-750.htm

The Enterprise carrier group has been in the area for a while:

Enterprise, the flagship of Commander, Carrier Strike Group (CSG) 12, and Commander, Destroyer Squadron (DESRON) 2, along with Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 1, will conduct maritime security operations and fly missions in support of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom as part of U.S. Fifth Fleet while in the region.

http://www.wtkr.com/Global/story.asp?S=5355276&nav=ZolHbyvj

The Enterprise Carrier Strike Group also includes:

-guided missile cruiser USS Leyte Gulf-CG-55
Armament: MK26 missile launcher (CG 47 thru CG 51) Standard Missile (MR) or MK41 vertical launching system (CG 52 thru CG 73) Standard Missile (MR); Vertical Launch ASROC (VLA) Missile; Tomahawk Cruise Missile; Six MK-46 torpedoes (from two triple mounts); Two MK 45 5-inch/54 caliber lightweight guns; Two Phalanx close-in-weapons systems.
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=4200&tid=800&ct=4

ARLEIGH BURKE - class Guided Missile Destroyer USS McFaul-DDG-74
Armament 1 x 5"/62 RF, Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM), 90 VLS Cells,
2 SH-60B helicopters, 8 Harpoon Missiles, 6 x 12.75" TT.
http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/01087.htm

the frigate USS Nicholas-FFG-47
Armament: one Mk 75 76mm/62 caliber rapid firing gun, MK 32 ASW torpedo tubes (two triple mounts), one Phalanx CIWS
http://navysite.de/ffg/FFG47.HTM

Los Angeles-class attack submarine USS Alexandria-SSN-757
Any boat of this class may launch a Tomahawk cruise missile from its horizontal torpedo tubes. The last 31 boats of this class also have 12 vertical launch tubes specifically for the purpose of launching Tomahawks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_class_submarine


The Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) is a short range missile intended to provide self-protection for surface ships.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/rim-162.htm

The Harpoon missile provides the Navy and the Air Force with a common missile for air, ship, and submarine launches. The weapon system uses mid-course guidance with a radar seeker to attack surface ships.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/agm-84.htm

Tactical Tomahawk Penetrator Variant missile
On 27 May 1999 Raytheon was awarded a $25,829,379 undefinitized cost-plus-incentive-fee/cost-plus-fixed-fee, ceiling amount contract for the modification of the Tactical Tomahawk missile to the Tactical Tomahawk Penetrator Variant configuration as part of the Second Counter-Proliferation Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration. The Tactical Tomahawk missile will be modified to incorporate the government-furnished penetrator warhead and the hard-target smart fuze. Four Tactical Tomahawk Penetrator Variant missiles will be assembled to conduct the advanced concept technology demonstration testing. Work will be performed in Tucson AZ and is expected to be completed by March 2003.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/bgm-109.htm

There is some info being copied all over the net, that the Eisenhower (CVN 69) is a
nuclear battleship, which I have never heard of, ever. As you can see from this picture
posted @ navy times, the Eisenhower is indeed a carrier.



Families and friends watch on the pier at Norfolk Naval Station, Va., as the aircraft carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) gets underway on Tuesday. — Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Joshua Glassburn / U.S. Navy

NORFOLK NAVAL SHIPYARD, Va. — The Norfolk-based aircraft carrier George Washington entered the dry dock at Norfolk Naval Shipyard in Portsmouth, Va., on Sept. 29, the first step in a $300 million availability that will prepare the ship to replace the Yokosuka, Japan-based Kitty Hawk in 2008.

http://www.navytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2146364.php



USS George WashingtonCVN-73

Rear Adm. (lower half) Scott H. Swift has been assigned to the post at U.S. Naval Forces, U.S. Central Command, in Bahrain. Swift commanded Carrier Air Wing 14, which is assigned to the USS Abraham Lincoln.

http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=40502


.. as deputy commander, U.S. Naval Forces, U.S. Central Command, Bahrain. Swift is currently serving as deputy executive officer for Naval Aviation and Tactical Air Systems, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Washington, D.C.

http://www.defenselink.mil/Releases/Release.aspx?Releas...

SOooo.....Adm. Swift worked for Sec Def Rumsfeld.

I now feel a little stronger about the move to Swift @ CenT COm in Bahrain. In Essense it seems Rumsfeld has put one of his men into an important position, after a promotion earlier this year. And we all know the kind of officers that get promoted under SEC dEF Rummy.

On edit:

Adm. Swift is also President of the TAILHOOK officers ASsociation:


PRESIDENT CAPT SCOTT H. SWIFT,USN
Source: SDSU, AVROC 1979
Designation: Naval Aviator, 1980
Assignments: VA-94 (Nugget), VA-122 (Instructor), CVW-11 (CAG LSO), VA-97 (Department Head), Naval War College (Honors in Athletics), Strike Fighter Weapons School, Pacific (CO), VFA-97 (CO), OPNAV (Hornet Requirements), VFA-122 (CO), CVW-14 (CAG)
Hours/Traps: 4,000+/1,000+
Residence: Falls Church, Va.
Present Empl: Office of Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics/Air Warfare)
Other: 1989 U.S. Pacific Fleet Landing Signal Officer of the Year, 1992 Commander Michael G. Hoff, U.S. Pacific Fleet Attack Aviator of the Year, Participated in Operation Southern Watch, Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom



http://www.tailhook.org/Officers.html


What may be important about this promotion is that it puts an expert in carrier ops, on the ground @ COmCent. If I was about to ramp up carrier air ops, I would want an experienced air ops guy on the ground. That would be Admiral Swift.




Iranian Nuke sites from:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/nuke-fac.htm

Bunker Busters

This is the the GBU-28 or the BLU-113, is 19 feet (5.8 meters). It weighs about 4,400 pounds. The GBU-27/GBU-24 (aka BLU-109) is nearly identical to the GBU-28, except that it weighs only 2,000 pounds (900 kg). It is less expensive to manufacture, and a bomber can carry more of them on each mission.



Air-to-air view of GBU-28 hard target bomb on an F-15E Eagle.




The MOAB weapon is based upon the same principle as the BLU-82 “Daisy Cutter”, except that it is larger and has a guidance system. The weapon is expected to produce a tremendous explosion that would be effective against hard-target entrances. From :

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/moab.htm

[philb]

65. heheh

i have a really nice bridge for sale

[lonestarnot]

66. I did it yesterday while waiting to flip bushitler off. 50 people

stood in shocked silence when I yelled "How many of you are ready for war with Iran? We are on our way there, better pay attention."

[philb]

69. i would bet

49 of them thought you wanted to jog and the other one just wasn't paying attention.....

war with iran????????

good grief!!!!!!!!!!!!!

that should bring the voters out

[lonestarnot]

71. Personally, I'd rather they stay home. They were trapped or

they wouldn't have even been there. Heh

[TheWraith]

74. Not this again.

Look, folks, we've heard it here over and over again. We heard it before the 2004 election. We heard it after the election. We heard it all last year, and we've been hearing it all this year too. But the fact is that nothing has yet happened, and a perponderence of the evidence suggests that nothing is GOING to happen. They're not capable of pulling something like this off. The very best thing about the Bush administration is that they're a collection of morons, obsessives, and fuckups the likes of which the world has never seen. That can be bad when their failures give them inertia (9/11) but it also insures that that inertia will eventually find its way to rest, wrapped around the proverbial telephone pole.

[smoogatz]

87. Dumb, but energetic when driving their agenda.

a la tax cuts, Iraq, lining the pockets of their cronies, etc.

[Marie26]

76. And a US ship was going to be

sunk during the Israel/Lebanon war too, remember? These dire warnings usually turn out to be nothing at all.

[AzDar]

77. KICK!! n/t

[PerfectSage]

78. I don't think so

The Naz, Amex & NYSE composite index charts are bullish. I don't see it in the gold and oil futures charts or the Q's, SPX or Dow charts. Neither do I see in the advance/decline or new highs/new lows charts for the Naz and NYSE.

As of today, I don't think war with Iran will happen. The Dow and SPX are hitting 52 week highs and the Nasdaq and NYSE composite indexes are getting close to breaking the spring highs and setting brand new 52 week highs. If a war with Iran was immanent I don't think the charts would look so good.

I'd bet on no war.

[Dems Will Win]

82. I heard there were record put options on tomorrow

Anyone have that thread?

[PerfectSage]

88. I saw that thread

I don't know how to interpret open interest on index options. But I know that ever since the corection that started in May there's too much bearishness among investors. A lot of people think the bull market that started in Oct/2002 will end this year which might explain the index put levels.

http://www.decisionpoint.com/ChartSpotliteFiles/060915_itbm.html

imo, The rally/intermediate term bullish trend that started this summer has got more legs then most people realize. The nyse advance/decline line is nice and strong and still early rally looking and not weak and tired like in the later stages of an intermediate term bullish. Which is what it looked like in April/May.

My guess is a lotta bears that bought index puts are gonna get bitchslapped. ;)

[robertpaulsen]

95. Here you go.

October suprise coming? There may be proof. Look at Oct put options.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2278395

[Stuckinthebush]

89. Oh, come on! They aren't that crazy!

Right? I mean, even Bush wouldn't allow nukes to be used on Iran for the sole purpose of keeping control of congress.

Right?

Seriously, that would not just be crazy, it would be bat-shit crazy. No way is the administration that bat-shit crazy!

Right?

And then sending in warships knowing that they will be destroyed in order to get Americans angry at the "enemy" is the definition of super bat-shit crazy. Bush may be nuts, but come on....that nuts? No way!

Right?

He wouldn't start a war based on a cynical lie in order to maintain control....

oh my god

[John Gauger]

90. If we make overt moves against Iran

Congress will not need to delcare war. Iran will do that first.

[robertpaulsen]

91. Kicked, recommended and bookmarked!

:kick:

[many a good man]

92. No chance. There'd be a mutiny/military coup

Its quite common in banana republics, which perfectly describes bushist America.

USAF generals are the only ones keen on this idea. Marines and Army would foment a coup first. Or pull a Julius Caesar.

[John Gauger]

96. Are you joking?

Those kinds of things just do not happen in this country. I'm sure that many Army and Marine generals have strongly disagreed with Bush's policies in the past, but they have not assassinated him. These are military men that have been taught to worship their leaders. They will not murder their Commander in Chief.

[jmowreader]

93. This would kill Bush if he tried it

I don't mean politically.

I mean in real life.

I really think the military would attempt to assassinate Bush if he ordered ships hazarded and they went down.

I also think they'd kill him if he tried nuking Iran...and there are enough people between Bush and the triggermen that the strike wouldn't go off anyway.

[HuffleClaw]

94. i think a 'cuban missile crisis-style' blockade might be in the making

then they can pretend IRAN is the aggressor. its great for timing too, just imagine the news headlines 'iran showdown: day four'... i'd expect actual hostilities to ensue just before halloween. the scenario would begin with an 'announcement' that iran 'cannot be allowed...', perhaps even a pretext can be found to 'justify' it.

[cspanlovr]

97. I heard Ray McGovern say this will happen on 10/26, 27, or28.

He was on Book TV this past weekend, speaking from Camp Democracy on 9/19/06. He came right out and said that there will be an attack on one or more of our ships in the Persian Gulf, giving * an excuse for an attack on Iran. It really scared me. He said it is the "October Surprise". Ray McGovern does not mince words. I heard him testify before Congress, and he is the hero who asked Rumsfeld why he lied about knowing where the WMD were. He's a retired CIA officer and very credible IMHO.

[sofa king]

101. Interesting.

At 12 knots, ships leaving Norfolk on October 1 would reach the Persian Gulf on October 28.

http://www.distances.com/distance.php

[Jcrowley]

102. OPLAN 1002-04 - The Khuzestan Gambit?

OPLAN 1002-04 - The Khuzestan Gambit?

Forward presence of US forces in Iraq cements US credibility, strengthens deterrence, and facilitates transition from peace to war. Although ground forces provide the bulk of the long-term forward presence in Iraq, access to ports and airfields is essential to project other forces into the area. The continued presence of US forces in Iraq sends a strong visible message of the US commitment to defend this region. Presence is enhanced through on-going military-to-military interaction, cooperative defense measures, and prepositioning of equipment and supplies critical to US responsiveness and warfighting flexibility.

<snip>

OPLAN 1002-04 has probably been revised to reflect the American occupation of Iraq, and the power projection opportunities this provides against Iran. The Zagros Mountains form a natural pallisade defending Iran from incursions from Iraq. The Iranian province of Khuzestan is the one large piece of flat Iranian terrain to the west of the Zagros Mountains. American heavy forces could swiftly occupy Khuzestan, and in doing so seize control of most of Iran's oil resources, and non-trivial portions of the country's water supply and electrical generating capacity. Khuzestan is the most important pivot of Iran's economy. The existence of such huge resources as oil, gas and water in Khuzestan have changed the economic appearance of Iran. Oil first erupted from a well in the Massjed e Soleyman area, located in the southern Khuzestan province.

<snip>

The vast majority of Iran's crude oil reserves are located in giant onshore fields in the southwestern Khuzestan region near the Iraqi border and the Persian Gulf. Iran has 32 producing oil fields, of which 25 are onshore and 7 offshore. Major onshore fields include the following: Ahwaz-Asmari (700,000 bbl/d); Bangestan (around 245,000 bbl/d current production, with plans to increase to 550,000 bbl/d), Marun (520,000 bbl/d), Gachsaran (560,000 bbl/d), Agha Jari (200,000 bbl/d), Karanj-Parsi (200,000 bbl/d); Rag-e-Safid (180,000 bbl/d); Bibi Hakimeh (130,000 bbl/d), and Pazanan (70,000 bbl/d). Major offshore fields include: Dorood (130,000 bbl/d); Salman (130,000 bbl/d); Abuzar (125,000 bbl/d); Sirri A&E (95,000 bbl/d); and Soroush/Nowruz (60,000 bbl/d).

According to the Oil and Gas Journal (1/1/04), Iran holds 125.8 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, roughly 10% of the world's total, up from 90 billion barrels in 2003. In October 1999, Iran announced that it had made its biggest oil discovery in 30 years, a giant onshore field called Azadegan located in the southwestern province of Khuzestan, a few miles east of the border with Iraq. Reportedly, the Azadegan field contains proven crude oil reserves of 26 billion barrels. In July 2004, Iran's oil minister stated that the country's proven oil reserves had increased again, to 132 billion barrels, following new discoveries in the Kushk and Hosseineih fields in Khuzestan province.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/oplan-1002.htm

[Dems Will Win]

105. Hmm, if the neo-cons make oil $200 a barrel

then there will be a lot less oil used, and alternative energy will be here much quicker.

Carbon emissions will be less.Is this Bush's plan to address global warming?

[Jcrowley]

106. Qui bono?

Oil goes up to $100+/barrel big deal. For you and I and most others it's a bitch but for those who are calling the shots no big deal, they profit nicely. If this gets ugly poor Lee Raymond is gonna wish he hadn't cashed in his stocks.

Masters of War.

K&R

[IndyOp]

108. Dig this article by Richard Sanders - "How to Start a War" --

really incredible, historical perspective...

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2002/How-To-Start-A-WarMay02.htm

[kitty1]

111. Why cause WW111 when Diebold can keep them in power. n/t

[Donailin]

133. exactly.

plus it would come off as "wag the dog" in light of the foley scandal because a vote would be required, right?

[Clarkie1]

117. There is no military solution in Iran, there is only a military option.

"An American attack, he said, would alienate ordinary Iranians, including those who might be sympathetic to the U.S. “Iran is no longer living in the Stone Age, and the young people there have access to U.S. movies and books, and they love it,” he said. “If there was a charm offensive with Iran, the mullahs would be in trouble in the long run.”

Compare:

"We can't know precisely how the desire for freedom among the peoples of the Middle East will grow and evolve into movements that result in stable democratic governments. Different countries may take different paths. Progress may come from a beneficent king, from enlightened mullahs, from a secular military, from a women's movement, from workers returning from years spent as immigrants in Western Europe, from privileged sons of oil barons raised on MTV, or from an increasingly educated urban intelligentsia, such as the nascent one in Iran. But if the events of the last year tell us anything, it is that democracy in the Middle East is unlikely to come at the point of our gun. And Ronald Reagan would have known better than to try." -Wes Clark, "Broken Engagement," 5/2004

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0405.clark.html

It's a fundamental difference in philosophy. The neocons believe it is possible to achieve their aims by force. It is not.

We need to engage the Iranians, not alienate them.

[greblc]

120. Irreguardless of what Bush Pulls for his October suprise remember...

Loose Lips Sink Ships.

[Az_lefty]

127. these traitors are just crazy enough to pull some shit like this...

:hide:

[emlev]

129. Other October surprise possibilities--here's the Bin Laden Audition Tape

I believe this was done in 2004, at least that's when I first found it. It disappeared for awhile, but now it's back.

http://www.bobbyroos.com/whoplaysosama/OsamaAudition.html

I post it here because I think guerrilla tactics like this one that serve to publicize possible "surprise" moves can help to avert them. Think about ways to publicize the plans for a war on Iran that's timed to get votes. Then do them.

[Gman]

136. This is a VERY likely scenario

Buschco has no choice and we still don't completely comprehend how ruthless and viscious these people are. They face trial for war crimes, if not here in the US, then in the Hague and there's no way in hell they will let that happen, if they can help it.

[exlrrp]

137. Chicken Little, the sky really isn't falling

Interesting diary but did you ever stop to think that all these moves--if theyre really happening--might be just pushing pieces around on the chess board for effect? To keep the Iranians guessing? sometimes a threatened invasion can be as effective as a real invasion--it keeps the other side off balance and prparing for something that won't happen. There's also the posssibility of faking something about to happen happen and then something completely else happening--this is called a feint. There's other possibilities too.
I think the invasion of Iran is a straw man--I don't think Bush can do it with the forces we have. I think that if and when something needs to be done about the Iranians, the Israelis will do it--probably bomb their nuke facilities just like they did Saddam's. Israel has nothing to lose--the Iranians already hate them and want to wipe them out and the most to lose if the Iranians get The Bomb.
All this other stuff is a great theory but there may be other explanations for whats reallly happening